My Top 50 boxers of all time list

First topic message reminder :

1. Floyd Mayweather Jr
2. Sugar Ray Robinson
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Harry Greb
5. Henry Armstrong
6. Sugar Ray Leonard
7. Benny Leonard
8. Willie Pep
9. Tommy Hearns
10. Pernell Whitaker
11. Lennox Lewis
12. Joe Louis
13. Sam Langford
14. Gene Tunney
15. Ezzard Charles
16. Eder Jofre
17. Stanley Ketchel
18. Jack Johnson
19. Joe Gans
20. Bob Fitzsimmons
21. Roberto Duran
22. Bernard Hopkins
23. Marvin Hagler
24. Jimmy Wilde
25. Manny Pacquiao
26. Ricardo Lopez
27. Archie Moore
28. Barney Ross
29. Tony Canzoneri
30. Oscar De La Hoya
31. Roy Jones Junior
33. Alexis Arguello
33. Aaron Pryor
34. Mickey Walker
35. Sandy Saddler
36. Jake LaMotta
37. Evander Holyfield
38. Carlos Monzon
39. Larry Holmes
40. George Foreman
41. Julio Cesar Chavez
42. Charley Burley
43. Jack Dempsey
44. Michael Spinks
45. Ted Lewis
46. Joe Frazier
47. Salvador Sanchez
48. Erik Morales
49. Don Curry
50. Juan Manuel Marquez

Feel free to criticise my list. Add who you want on the list and who you dont. If im convinced I might change the list. You can also produce your own top 50 list.

Duran beat a BRAWLING Leonard ...mainly because he called Leonard's wife a WHORE!!!!!

What happened next ?

I'm off. fellas.

Have a great evening, one and all, and please be nice to each other. ( As nice as possible, anyway. )

See you tomorrow.

Goodnight mate.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Duran beat a BRAWLING Leonard ...mainly because he called Leonard's wife a WHORE!!!!!

What happened next ?

Exactly Leonard nearly beat Duran at his own game. The 2nd fight showed Leonard to be far superior to Duran.

Getting someone to fight your fight is part and parcel of boxing.

Many will agree that Degale is probably more technically gifted than Groves, yet Groves got him to fight his fight and got the decision.

We are saying that Duran only won (contentiously) because Leonard brawled......Not that you shouldn't use kidology etc..to gain an advantage..

However ..We are also saying that when he used his skills properly he embarassed him like Benitez, Hearns and god knows who else did..

They were more skilled yes, though Duran's incredible skill (though of a different kind to Leonard/Hearns/Benitez) itself shouldn't be overlooked.

Some objectivity is needed here, Duran was smaller than these guys, was older than these guys, and had been in some wars before facing them. To beat Leonard in Montreal was one of the single finest wins in the history of the sport of boxing. Leonard avenged it in style, but Duran won the first nevertheless.

Hearns was all wrong for him, a monster of a welterweight and his murderous punching combined with his skills and size advantage were always likely to be too much.

Leave it out......Wasn't older than Dejesus...

28 or so when he fought leonard???? old man wasn't he...

Hearns had nothing to do with weight he was completely humiliated by a stiff jab...that combinations bounced off..

Yeah objectivity is needed but not by us mate..

Not saying he was old, I'm just saying he was older, particularly in a boxing sense whereby he had been involved in plenty of gruellers by then.

Again, I didn't say it was Hearns' weight, it was the size advantage in terms of reach and height that didn't help Duran's cause. However, there is no denying that Thomas Hearns (with a chin) is the best of the fab 4, in my book, real top quality fighter.

I'm not trying to say Duran was better than them, but I'm trying to get across that he was better than many give him credit for, and that each fight he had against the above names should be looked at in context.

Hopkins has been in a lot of gruellers as was Ali......

They were never rolled like drunks...

Truss I don't get why you're holding Hearns against Duran so vehemently. A huge welter beating a career lightweight at light middleman is hardly a win to boast about. You can't discount Duran's win over Leonard yet hold Hearns against him!!

I'm lost now. Have we agreed that Mayweather is the best?

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:I'm lost now. Have we agreed that Mayweather is the best?

I think we agreed that he should be about five places higher...

i dont know what rolled like a drunk means, but then again i don't know who 'Hoppo' is, so i won't try and guess. However, slating Duran truss, he beat a fresh Leonard, and was the first man to do so, a Leonard who was the better man than Hearns, and beat Benitez, Hagler, Duran. Leonard should be number 2/3, with Robinson number 1 imo.

Apparently when a 5'7" lightweight is obliterated by a huge 6'1" welter, at middleweight, it's an indication that he was rubbish. Not just that he'd bitten off more than he could chew way above his natural weight.

You owned me did you PBF, love the fact you you hadn't got a clue who 'ERNESTO' Marcel was until I mentioned him I really really do and for future reference don't bother trying to act smart when you make such fundamental errors.

Game, set and match

Imperial Ghosty wrote:You owned me did you PBF, love the fact you you hadn't got a clue who 'ERNESTO' Marcel was until I mentioned him I really really do and for future reference don't bother trying to act smart when you make such fundamental errors.

Game, set and match

How is that game, set and match?...I love the fact you declare your the winner even though you got owned on the Duran debate.

In future I wont act too smart as I know deep down it makes you feel uncomfortable and insecure. Also make it clear which Marcel you were talking about i.e. Marcel Cerdan or Ernesto Marcel because of your delayed replies anyone can get mixed up.

You still bitter at not becoming mod?

BALTIMORA wrote:Apparently when a 5'7" lightweight is obliterated by a huge 6'1" welter, at middleweight, it's an indication that he was rubbish. Not just that he'd bitten off more than he could chew way above his natural weight.

Wrong again balti it was at light middleweight and weight Duran was comfortable at. Stop using size as an excuse for Duran's defeat and give Hearns his due.

Yeah it's a typo on my part. Not that you'll believe that. Six inch height disadvantage? TWELVE inch reach disadvantage? 20lbs above his best weight? Yeah, that's right...Duran was absolutely made for 154. Every single card was stacked in Hearns' favour. He beat up a fat lightweight...oh, but then you like that kind of thing, don't you...

Wrong again balti it was at light middleweight and weight Duran was comfortable at. Stop using size as an excuse for Duran's defeat and give Hearns his due.
//////////////////////////
Yeah a 9 stone 9 guy fighting at 11 clem, that's comfortable aint it? sheep is it? cow's no its bull. Do us all a favour and pipe down. Serafim Todorov is the man

Young_Towzer wrote:Wrong again balti it was at light middleweight and weight Duran was comfortable at. Stop using size as an excuse for Duran's defeat and give Hearns his due.
//////////////////////////
Yeah a 9 stone 9 guy fighting at 11 clem, that's comfortable aint it? sheep is it? cow's no its bull. Do us all a favour and pipe down. Sarafim Todorov is the man

Still stalking me again

BALTIMORA wrote:Yeah it's a typo on my part. Not that you'll believe that. Six inch height disadvantage? TWELVE inch reach disadvantage? 20lbs above his best weight? Yeah, that's right...Duran was absolutely made for 154. Every single card was stacked in Hearns' favour. He beat up a fat lightweight...oh, but then you like that kind of thing, don't you...

Size does not win you fights skill does.

Still stalking me again Laugh
...............................
i don't stalk obsessed fans, nice try however
Nice try however, regards.....Steven 'Serafim Todorov' Towzer

Young_Towzer wrote:Still stalking me again Laugh
...............................
i don't stalk obsessed fans, nice try however
Nice try however, regards.....Steven 'Serafim Todorov' Towzer

That your new nickname Steven? A guy who robbed Floyd Mayweather of olympic gold.

That your new nickname Steven? A guy who robbed Floyd Mayweather of olympic gold.
.............................
No, honest Todorov won the fight. But no it's not my nickname look to the right it's still Young_Towzer

The genius of PBF wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Yeah it's a typo on my part. Not that you'll believe that. Six inch height disadvantage? TWELVE inch reach disadvantage? 20lbs above his best weight? Yeah, that's right...Duran was absolutely made for 154. Every single card was stacked in Hearns' favour. He beat up a fat lightweight...oh, but then you like that kind of thing, don't you...

Size does not win you fights skill does.

When two boxers possess roughly equal attributes in terms of skill, the boxer with the physical advantage is considered the greater likelihood for victory. Jog on, WUM.

BALTIMORA wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Yeah it's a typo on my part. Not that you'll believe that. Six inch height disadvantage? TWELVE inch reach disadvantage? 20lbs above his best weight? Yeah, that's right...Duran was absolutely made for 154. Every single card was stacked in Hearns' favour. He beat up a fat lightweight...oh, but then you like that kind of thing, don't you...

Size does not win you fights skill does.

When two boxers possess roughly equal attributes in terms of skill, the boxer with the physical advantage is considered the greater likelihood for victory. Jog on, WUM.

I think you will find Hearns has more skill than Duran for you to say it is roughly equal is a insult.

Run along, stalker

Seeing as I haven't once mentioned Marcel Cerdan on this thread but have constantly talked about Durans wins over Ernesto Marcel it doesn't take a genius to work out who I was asking you about

Would love to know how you've schooled me on the Duran thing, all you've done is jumped on Truss bandwagon and repeated everything he's said

More to the point Ghosty, it would seem that anyone who persists in putting forward their own opinion is branded a stalker. Basically he's perpetuating the Hearns thing because if he can convince people Hearns didn't hold any physical advantage the knock-on implication is that Mayweather's win over JMM was equally legitimate. Which it wasn't.

The genius of PBF wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Yeah it's a typo on my part. Not that you'll believe that. Six inch height disadvantage? TWELVE inch reach disadvantage? 20lbs above his best weight? Yeah, that's right...Duran was absolutely made for 154. Every single card was stacked in Hearns' favour. He beat up a fat lightweight...oh, but then you like that kind of thing, don't you...

Size does not win you fights skill does.

When two boxers possess roughly equal attributes in terms of skill, the boxer with the physical advantage is considered the greater likelihood for victory. Jog on, WUM.

I think you will find Hearns has more skill than Duran for you to say it is roughly equal is a insult.

Run along, stalker

Much as I trust the opinion of a person who has Mayweather as the #1 ATG...

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Seeing as I haven't once mentioned Marcel Cerdan on this thread but have constantly talked about Durans wins over Ernesto Marcel it doesn't take a genius to work out who I was asking you about

Would love to know how you've schooled me on the Duran thing, all you've done is jumped on Truss bandwagon and repeated everything he's said

Me and truss share the same opinion on Duran but our views differ on other things such as Lennox Lewis...You on the otherhand suck up to other posters to try and make yourself look smart.

As for the Marcel thing...Your like a dog and a bone ghosty get over it and move on.

You got taken back to nursery rather than school. A statue would have been more of a challenge.

BALTIMORA wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Yeah it's a typo on my part. Not that you'll believe that. Six inch height disadvantage? TWELVE inch reach disadvantage? 20lbs above his best weight? Yeah, that's right...Duran was absolutely made for 154. Every single card was stacked in Hearns' favour. He beat up a fat lightweight...oh, but then you like that kind of thing, don't you...

Size does not win you fights skill does.

When two boxers possess roughly equal attributes in terms of skill, the boxer with the physical advantage is considered the greater likelihood for victory. Jog on, WUM.

I think you will find Hearns has more skill than Duran for you to say it is roughly equal is a insult.

Run along, stalker

Much as I trust the opinion of a person who has Mayweather as the #1 ATG...

No boxer in the history of the sport has the skill level of Floyd Mayweather.

BALTIMORA wrote:More to the point Ghosty, it would seem that anyone who persists in putting forward their own opinion is branded a stalker. Basically he's perpetuating the Hearns thing because if he can convince people Hearns didn't hold any physical advantage the knock-on implication is that Mayweather's win over JMM was equally legitimate. Which it wasn't.

Both fights were won on skill not physical advantages...oh gosh I have to teach you everything.

The genius of PBF wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:More to the point Ghosty, it would seem that anyone who persists in putting forward their own opinion is branded a stalker. Basically he's perpetuating the Hearns thing because if he can convince people Hearns didn't hold any physical advantage the knock-on implication is that Mayweather's win over JMM was equally legitimate. Which it wasn't.

Both fights were won on skill not physical advantages...oh gosh I have to teach you everything.

The only thing you've taught me is patience.

One thing I'll give you credit for PBF is that no other WUM attracts so many comments!!

PBF you are talking utter garbage. Hearns beat Duran on massive size advantages, hence the reason Duran not being able to get close, and let's remember that this wasn't Duran at his natural weight. Duran was an incredibly skilled boxer, and pound for pound was not too far away from Hearns at all, indeed his record is far superior.

Hearns won because he was able to establish his jab with pinpoint accuracy which was helped by having a huge reach advantage, were they the same size with the same skill level then the fight would have panned out far differently

It's interesting to see someone get something very wrong and then make up a whole host of excuses why, would be more sensible to admit you were wrong and move on

PBF you are talking utter garbage
................
In the words of Geoffrey out of the fresh prince of Bel Air
'Game set match'

Fists of Fury wrote:PBF you are talking utter garbage. Hearns beat Duran on massive size advantages, hence the reason Duran not being able to get close, and let's remember that this wasn't Duran at his natural weight. Duran was an incredibly skilled boxer, and pound for pound was not too far away from Hearns at all, indeed his record is far superior.

Duran is so skilled he had no answer to Hearns jab. He beat Duran at a weight he was comfortable at, proven by the fact Duran went the distance with Hagler. Skill wins fights not size, the excuses made for Duran is funny though. Got beat by Leonard and Hearns yet gets rated higher than them.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Hearns won because he was able to establish his jab with pinpoint accuracy which was helped by having a huge reach advantage, were they the same size with the same skill level then the fight would have panned out far differently

It's interesting to see someone get something very wrong and then make up a whole host of excuses why, would be more sensible to admit you were wrong and move on

Let me know when you admit your wrong.

Young_Towzer wrote:PBF you are talking utter garbage
................
In the words of Geoffrey out of the fresh prince of Bel Air
'Game set match'

Still stalking

Off to bed, Bedtime for some...When I wake up hopefully ghosty admits he was owned.

PBF, leave the stalking nonsense out...very childish.

Of course size makes a difference in fights, otherwise your idol Floyd would be heavyweight champion of the world...what a ridiculous comment.

Yes I was owned by you PBF despite the fact you don't know who Ernesto Marcel is, good one

Still stalking
..........................
you sound desperate and childish

I think by "stalker" he means:

Those much more intelligent who aren't here for a pathetic WUM and don't claim to be "going to bed" as a means to say "I'm FMJ and i live in America".

He's back to being a WUM and i don't know why those in charge should stand for it. This forum was better without him here and i have zero idea why he's been allowed back having been BANNED once already.

Yeah I have to laugh that he takes his 'I am FMJ' stance so seriously that he claims to be going to bed.

By going to bed, I'd wager he means he is logging on to an alias, to stir another pot.

Fists

When signing up does his IP address also come through on the registry? When configuring forums on the CMS framework i use the email bounce back to the main admin can contain the users IP address if they want that field in there

Duplicate = alias time.

Yeah I have to laugh that he takes his 'I am FMJ' stance so seriously that he claims to be going to bed.

By going to bed, I'd wager he means he is logging on to an alias, to stir another pot.
...............................
Surely someone who isn't a WUM cannot be so bias Fists? and if you don't agree with him that Mayweather's the best ever he calls you a stalker, laughable, i'd ban him me.

I personally think the forum would run far better if people stopped asking for people to be banned and worried about observing the house rules themselves. From what I can see the mods, on the boxing boards doa decent job of keeping on top of everything on here so personally would trust them to carry on doing so, but that's just my opinion.